8 On the other hand, it was recognised that, in view of variations in national rules and practice, a case by case approach would have to be adopted in this area, it being understood that the matter would be "resolved in the spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation upon which the Convention is founded" (cf. paragraph 64 of the Explanatory Report on the Convention). 15. Experience had shown that problems of access to medical records and other documents often had their origins in a lack of knowledge about the Convention and the CPT on the part of those concerned. In this connection, there was general agreement on the importance of national authorities ensuring that information was circulated on the Committee's mandate and the related obligations of Parties to the Convention, including to persons/bodies which may not be directly accountable to those authorities (eg. members of the medical and legal professions). 16. A number of liaison officers suggested that if allegations of ill-treatment were received during a visit, the CPT should contact the liaison officer - or another trustworthy person/body appointed by the State Party before the visit report was drawn up. This would enable the national authorities to investigate the allegations as soon as possible and, if necessary, implement appropriate measures. In reply, it was stressed that the CPT fully shared the national authorities' concern about the need to react rapidly to allegations of ill-treatment. However, it was vital to strike the right balance between the confidentiality of a CPT interview with a detained person and the requirement of cooperation enshrined in the Convention. Often the persons involved did not want information which could identify them to be released ; even if this was not the case, it was not necessarily in their interests for specific information to be given. In consequence, it would be difficult to define a uniform approach. 17. Among other matters discussed, it should be mentioned that there was broad agreement with the approach adopted by the CPT in relation to "immediate observations" under Article 8 (5) of the Convention. Some liaison officers pointed out that such observations had enabled necessary improvements to be made rapidly. Inevitably, the perennial question of the Committee's title was also raised. It was mentioned that management and staff of places visited sometimes found the term "torture" difficult to accept. In this context, it was agreed that when States issued identity documents to CPT delegations, they could if they wished use a title which they considered more appropriate to their national situations. However, in Council of Europe documents, the CPT's official title would continue to be used. It was also pointed out that any difficulties in this area could best be overcome by better information on the true nature and extent of the CPT's mandate (cf. also the 2nd General Report - CPT/Inf (92) 3, paragraph 63). 18. To sum up, the CPT welcomes the wide-ranging and constructive nature of its discussions with the liaison officers and has the intention of organising similar meetings at three to four yearly intervals.